Quote from: Cosmo on July 20, 2016, 06:35:10 PM
Now I'll have to take issue with your opinions on Suzie. A lot of good fun...screwball comedy type stuff...and interesting to see adventures beyond high school. Some of the best covers found on any Archie title as well. Of course that is what makes it interesting ...different stuff amuses different people.
I don't claim to be any great expert on SUZIE... pretty much all I've read are the stories infrequently reprinted in the digests (sans credits, alas), and some of the public domain ones available at DCM. SUZIE just sort of strikes me as the most Marvel-like (or Atlas-like, if you prefer) of all the Archie Comics titles, and suffers by comparison to the better Marvel ones (although they had the likes of Dan DeCarlo, Stan Goldberg and Al Hartley working for them in the 1950s, so...). I can't even quite figure if there was one pre-eminent artist on SUZIE. Was there a definitive Suzie artist, like with Harry Lucey's GINGER? It's not like I'm saying they're absolutely dreadful or anything, just... compared to what Harry Lucey did with GINGER, or ARCHIE, or even the older BETTY AND VERONICA stories by Dan DeCarlo from the early 50s?? All I'm really saying here is that for the time period, stuff like SUZIE and WILBUR wasn't even ACP's "A"-game, never mind what Marvel/Atlas was doing at the same time. So, yeah, for me... underwhelming. I mean, sometimes the covers aren't bad, but like a lot of comics, the covers tend to be the best part of the comic. I wasn't really even considering that, just thinking of the various Suzie stories I've read, none of which were particularly memorable.
Maybe it's a little like Super Duck, where there are better ones, and not-so-better ones. Super Duck actually morphed through a lot of different character designs over the years* -- personally, I prefer the earliest (ever-so-brief) iteration of the character, when he actually WAS super, but then I always did like Mighty Mouse, Hoppy the Marvel Bunny, and other super-animal characters.
*(See>> http://www.misterkitty.org/extras/stupidcovers/stupidcomics136.html)
I guess it's all in the yardstick you're using for comparison purposes. With the '50s Archie Comics, I have to stack them against their competition at Marvel/Atlas, and with Super Duck it's obviously going to be measured against the Western/Dell/KK Disney ducks, or for that matter, even the better Harvey funny animal comics, like Baby Huey. So maybe it sounds a little flip and dismissive to compare Al Fagaly to Carl Barks... but honestly, Fagaly was no Al Taliaferro, either, to choose a maybe fairer comparison. When they pick the better stories to reprint in the digests, it helps to give a digest some variety, so 12 pages or so of Super Duck isn't necessarily a bad thing, possibly more like a welcome replacement for what I'd consider some of the "lesser" Archie reprints.